RE : Warning message in bridge mode

[Vu Hai NGUYEN <vh.nguyen@actiasodielec.fr>]

Hi Ben,
Can you create a firmware that is the same as 10.1.467-2-1 but include your fix for promiscuous mode?
I would like to do the test of rate in bridge network to see if the performance is better or not.
But as your firmware contain other commit that might make the rate slower so I would like to ask you could create
this version of firmware.
Thanks in advance,

NGUYEN Vu Hai
Acita-Sodielec
Route de Mayres - B.P. 9
12100 St GEORGES DE LUZENCON
FRANCE

________________________________________
De : Ben Greear [greearb@candelatech.com]
Date d'envoi : mardi 24 juin 2014 17:10
À : Vu Hai NGUYEN; Bruno Antunes
Cc : Patrick CARNEIRO RODRIGUEZ; ath10k@lists.infradead.org
Objet : Re: RE : Warning message in bridge mode

On 06/24/2014 12:39 AM, Vu Hai NGUYEN wrote:

> I was wrong, the only warning msg is "br0: received packet on wlan0.sta1 with own address as source address".
> And I have another question: When doing test with iperf, I always have rate from AP to STA higher than STA to AP
> (380Mbps vs 240 Mbps).This is normal too right? Cause before you told me that when you did the test with your
> own trafficgenerator, you can get 500+Mbps download, and about 400Mbps upload.

We have done some tests recently on E5 3.7Ghz systems (ie, top-end-ish server systems)
that can push 800+Mbps UDP, but can't recall if that is upload or download.

We need to re-run tests and publish the info.

Looks like host CPU is very important to higher-speeds with ath10k.  I did a perf top
months ago, and there was bad contention on a spinlock or two in ath10k driver, so that
is probably much of the performance problems we see.

Thanks,
Ben

--
Ben Greear <greearb@candelatech.com>
Candela Technologies Inc  http://www.candelatech.com


_______________________________________________
ath10k mailing list
ath10k@lists.infradead.org
http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/ath10k